NoMoreFakeNews.com

Where should the power be?

There are various kinds of power. Perhaps you’ll recognize the type I’m referring to in this article.

WHERE SHOULD THE POWER BE? This is a question that has been asked and answered for a hundred thousand years. Wars, death, destruction, deception, grand theft, heroism, manifestos have all provided evidence of the struggle.

We now have people behind the curtain and peeking out of the curtain claiming the answer, for our sake, is global governance. Call it anything you want to. New World Order. Globalism. Planetary management system.

They assert their motives are altruistic. That’s right. They’re not doing this to make a power grab, they’re helping us. They’re solving the problems of the world. They’re maintaining order. They’re bringing us into a new era of peace.

They’re all liars.

There isn’t an altruistic bone in their bodies.

And as far as we are concerned, we have a whole lot of self-deception going as well. Why? Because we keep falling into collectivist language and thought. We think we can’t talk about power unless we address the great WE, the group, humanity, The People.

We’re afraid of mentioning power in the context of the individual.

It has to be family, community, group, species.

It’s we against them.

Well, it isn’t.

That’s just another delusion.

It is now, and always has been, the individual.

WE is about mystical religion. WE is about submerging the individual in some delusional fictitious Whole.

In that box, it’s just the WE of the globalists versus the WE of the vague mystics. And the outcome, in the long run, will be the same.

The New Age people, no matter what disguise they are wearing, are afraid to make a proposition about individual power and back it up.

They cower behind pseudo-science and limp philosophy to create another WE.

Behind all the drugs and rebellion and music and so-called freedom of the 1960s, the real and lasting failure was the omission of the INDIVIDUAL. He was never spoken for. And the clear reason for it was fear, that’s all. Fear of power for one person, and then another person, and so on.

Then and now, people say to themselves, “What power? How can I have power? What would that look like? What would that feel like? What would that be? I don’t understand. I can only see power in a group.”

It’s as if a blind person believed he could only regain his sight as part of a collective. On his own, it would never work, but as a member of a group, a cipher, the rebirth might occur.

Notions of various Utopias are always about the group. History flows into a paradise where the species lives, and the individual is finally and miraculously submerged in the collective.

Yes, well, that’s the definition of non-consciousness. It’s a sketch of fascism.

The mystical WE says to the globalist We, “You want coercion and slavery. We want peace and love.”

The truth is they are both heading to the same place.

The illusion of power rests in the group. The reality of power rests in the individual.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Post navigation

5 comments on “Where should the power be?”

Jon claims the drug culture of the sixties was about fear of the individual. I disagree, it was about fear of rationally based organised opposition against the elites agenda of war etc. While individuals may pose a threat to oligarchic power, organised and factbased opposition is a bigger threat. The drug culture is about individualistic pleasure seeking.

I also disagree with Jon. We live in a world of 8 billion peoples. We need laws otherwise we would be killing each other everyday. What Jon is promoting is pure utopia.

Sure the individual has great power imagination and creativity, but he has to live in the real world.

Example: An individual invents the train and railroads, Bravo! Still he needs thousand of workers to make it come true. A collective effort.

Another genius invents a car and a collective effort of workers makes it happen. Millions of people buy the cars, Roads are created by collective workers effort and new laws comes along, like street lights, stop signs and speed limits.

Some bad dudes in a country declares wars against us. our military (a collective effort) raise up to defend us.

The way I see it, is that the only true individual power is as an example, what Trump is doing right now. But still, he needs people backing him otherwise it will not work.

So much for the individual power! In my mind it is very limited in this world.

For sure we can do paintings and music and write books and create movies and invent all sort of things, but that is about all. The rest, the big things always need a collective effort in this world.

With all due respect, all people have rights, i.e., the right to be left alone if you are not hurting someone else, the right to work and prosper, et al. We have certainly been brainwashed to believe that laws, not natural rights, keep things in order, but they do not. People are currently “killing each other everyday” and I would say that governments kill more people than any individual could even fathom killing. Laws do little if anything to actually stop crime, but they do an excellent job of allowing governments to control the people.

“And as far as we are concerned, we have a whole lot of self-deception going as well.” Why?
Because we keep falling into collectivist language and thought. We think we can’t talk about power unless we address the great WE, the group, humanity, The People.”

………Isn’t this an example of collectivist language? ,,,, or is that the other WE